I'm not sure how much an app store "saves" market share in government, but I do know cost is a factor. I am in government and just received a Z10 after having a 9900 for a few years. Our agency was looking to go iPhone, but AT&T literally gave us the devices FOR FREE and then a credit of about $32 per old device for recycling, so the net cost of going iPhone would have been $40,000 (400 devices at about $100 per) and the net cost of Blackberry was -$12,800 (technically -$52,800 if you count the "saved" $100 per device). IT described it to me as "status quo with better hardware, and we can kick the can of moving platforms down the line or until BB goes out of business."

The more we hear about surveillance the more I think about this quote from the 1995 movie "Heat":
"Assume they got our phones, assume they got our houses, assume they got us, right here, right now as we sit, everything. Assume it all."

Hopefully better than Nextel + Sprint did!! As I recall the iDEN to CDMA transition was a clusterf***.

Better get a move on then; I'll hold your beer until you get back.

CORRECTION: Effective rate would be "Total Tax/AGI = Effective rate" which gives me (a lowly common citizen) 10.5%.

I can luckily use a family member who is an accountant. She charges us a flat $50 fee and it's worth it because in 2013 we had: two kid deductions, cashed out some (very) small investments, sold a rental property short at a horrendous loss, got a tax bill for the "forgiven" debt on the short sale, and other hijinks.

In the press a lot has been made of the Romney's and Obama's "effective" tax rate: that is, "Adjusted Gross Income/Total Tax = Effective tax rate". Romney's was something like 14.1% and Obama's was 20.4%. Populist rage ensued over both "not paying their fair share." I felt that same rage but then looked: my effective rate was 9.53%!!!! That sure surprised me.

So /.ers: look at your effective tax rate - are you higher or lower than these "greedy bastards"?

**bump** **bump***

The sound the bus makes running over the engineers thrown under.

Not debating the merits of the NTIS' services, but let's look at the argument that they "cost the taxpayer's money" for an agency to buy from them.

If Agency X purchases $50 worth of product from NTIS, $50 of taxpayer money is simply moved from Agency X's budget to the NTIS budget. No taxpayer money was "spent" it was just a Funny Money transaction. If Agency X spends $50 at Amazon.com then $50 was SPENT (i.e. left the Federal government for the private sector).

Now if Agency X somehow finds the needed document for free and gets it, avoiding "spending" $50, does the taxpayer save money? I say no. Agency X will "use it or lose it" when it comes to their budget and will simply spend that $50 somewhere else. So is there any real benefit to such a bill?

Since I am the nerd of the family (I'm sure many of you can appreciate that), family always asks me: should I get on Twitter? My answer is "probably not" because it is really terrible as a person-to-person communication platform. 140 char limit will do that to you.

I use Twitter and it does have some uses, and I tell the family and friends that it's useful for...

* Breaking news (it's like a wire-service for the masses);

* Closely following a product/celebrity/athlete/event/sport;

* Posting a short question on a specific topic via #;

* Posting or finding witticisms and satire;

* Posting or finding a status report (not viable to foster a discussion by any means); and

* Finding spam, click-bait, impersonators of real people, bots, pr0n, and completely inaccurate information.

I mainly use Twitter myself to follow athletes in the NFL (primarily my team, Green Bay) and the three forms of motorsport I watch: NASCAR, Formula 1, and IndyCar. I really like Twitter during one of these sporting events because posters can give you more detail/insight into the event or people involved than just the TV or radio broadcasters (Example: sideline/pit reporters or members of a team participating in the event who can tweet during the event.)

IMHO though, the spam/bots/clickbait is out of control and detracts from the platform.

To be fair, it IS still legal to have a man in blue and red underwear gather nuclear waste into a gigantic net, fly it into space, and hurtle it into the Sun.

It's not a method that is popular with the public nor critically acclaimed, but it is still legal.

*citation needed

No no no. The filter got it right! Those New Braunfels Republican Women are SKANKS!!!

I would guess that 40 years ago your parents had...

1 single family home, less than 2000 sq.ft., 3 bedrooms or less, 1 bathroom
1 car (maybe 2?)
1 television (maybe a second in a basement that was old?) with over-the-air programming of less than 20 channels
1 landline telephone
1 still, film camera
1 stay at home mom

Whereas today I am guessing your two incomes support...
1 single family home, greater than 2000 sq.ft., 3 bedrooms or more, 2 bathrooms or more
2 cars (or more)
3 or more televisions with pay tv programming in excess of 300 channels plus time shifting/DVR technology
1 mobile phone PER PERSON over age 13 with access to worldwide information resources; point-to-point videoconferencing; a multi-thousand long collection of music, photos, and video; still-photograph and high resolution video capability
Paid child care for dependents under 6 years old

The above situation is true for my household. If we lived like my parents did even 30 years ago, one of us could stay home AND we could sock some money away to the bank.

Our standards of "normal lifestyle" has changed.